Peer Review Worksheet for Media Analysis Paper

Directions: Write your name at the top of a separate sheet of paper. On one side, list "Reader Response," and on the other "Reading for Focus and Development," depending on which reading task you did for Part II.

PART I Responding as a Reader

Read through the writer's draft, noting in the margins any questions that occur to you. Do NOT proofread for grammar, etc. That's not your job. When finished reading, offer a written response detailing what you like about the paper and any suggestions you would offer based on your first read-through.

PART II Reading for Focus or Development

Choose to read either for focus or development. If you are a second reader, read for whichever purpose the first reader did not. Answer the following questions for "focus" or "development" on the opposite side of the paper as your reader response. Use an additional sheet if necessary.

Reading for Focus

Find the thesis paragraph/statements and rewrite it on the top of your response sheet.

Do a descriptive outline of the rest of the paper on the left-hand side (i.e., a list of each point made in the paper, remembering that a paragraph may make more than one point).

Which points in your descriptive outline have a connection back to the thesis? Write what that connection seems to be on the right-hand side.

Which points have no relation to the thesis that you can see? Mark these with a "?" in the right-hand column.

Make recommendations about focus to the writer. Are there ways to revise the thesis to include the unrelated points in #5? Are they better off cutting those sections? Are the connections in #4 apparent to the reader, or should they write clearer transitions to make these connections obvious?

Reading for Development

Find the thesis paragraph/statements and recopy on your response sheet.

Break the thesis paragraph/statements down into sub-claims. That is, list each element which will need to be developed or proven in order for this paper to fulfill the "promise" it makes to readers in the introductory sections. Number each sub-claim.

Read through the rest of the paper for where each claim gets developed. Mark the writer's draft in the margins with the number of which claim seems to be addressed where.

Look back through your markings and list all sub-claims in the thesis which do NOT get any development at all. Make suggestions about what needs to be added here and/or how the thesis might be revised so that these issues aren't expected to be addressed.

Look back through the sections marked. Does each receive adequate support/development? Which ones would you suggest adding more support to? Any ideas for that support?

Finally, look at the order of your markings and suggest any re-organization. Does #2 appear, for example, in three different places in the paper? Should these be moved/combined?